#targaryen blood supremacy critical

[gwenllian-in-the-abbey]

I'm not being rude or evasive and if so, forgive me. I just have this doubt: why don't you illustrate baela with black skin like in the HBO series?

I'll tag the artist, @aifsaath in on this too, in case I'm speaking out of turn, but it is indeed something that we definitely discussed when we decided make this fic happen.

The simple answer is that we're writing from the book canon, and we went with book descriptions when possible, including their coloring and their body types. Of course, whenever there's an adaptation, the actors portrayed in the show are going to be the ones who first pop into people's minds, regardless of whether the fic is set in the book canon or the show canon, and that's fine! In fact, my first long-fic is based more on the show-verse, and I described that Baela as she appears on the show, with curly silver hair and brown skin. To me, they're different canons and there are legit reasons to choose one or the other, or to mix them up. For this fic we wanted to stick to one consistent canon rather than mixing and matching, and since the majority of the events that happen in this fic have not been depicted on the show yet, and won't for many years to come, we decided to go with Fire and Blood. Less simple answer below the cut.

Here's the more complicated answer. While the show chooses not to focus too heavily on this aspect of the world building, the Valyrians are racial supremacists. They believe in blood purity and consider themselves to be better than non-Valyrians. The Targaryen dynasty in particular has built a whole mythos around Targaryen exceptionalism based on their special blood, but the blood is shown time and again to not actually be all that special. It's a lie, like white supremacy itself is a lie. Targaryens can't get sick, until they do. Only those with Targaryen blood can ride dragons, until Nettles comes along. Targaryens must marry their brothers and sisters, and nothing bad will come of this because they are a special exception, but it literally ruins multiple people's lives and causes at least one massive war. The Valyrians weren't special chosen ones, they were slavers, eugenicists, they practiced blood magic (heavily implied to involve human sacrifice), and their hubris led to their doom. And while it's kind of heavy handed, it's not coincidental that GRRM made these folks pale haired and pale skinned and made them obsessed with preserving Targaryen purity. OFCIR is critical of this, and we did not think it was a great idea to make George's fantasy version of white supremacists into POC since they are blood supremacists in our fic, something the show waters down a lot, at least so far. George has actually said that he once had the idea of making ALL of the Valyrians Black, as a kind of uno-reverse on white supremacy, but realized that would probably be a bad look and scrapped the idea.

Some fans are also very attached to the idea of the special blood actually being special. Online I've already seen people arguing that Nettles, who was written in the books as a Black woman, could simply be of Velaryon blood (nevermind that the Velaryons were not dragonriders by blood, Addam Velaryon rides a dragon, probably due to centuries of Velaryon mixing with the Targs), when in Fire and Blood it is heavily implied that Nettles tamed a dragon the good old fashioned way (by feeding it!) rather than bonding to one by blood. And when Rhaenyra believes Nettles is fooling around with Daemon, she throws around insults that imply Nettles' blood is impure, calling her "common," saying Daemon would never lie with such a "low creature," and finally accuses her of sorcery to tame her dragon, saying, "you only have to look at her to know she doesn't have a drop of dragon blood in her." Hair and eye color alone can't be what she's talking about either, because book!Rhaenys has dark hair, and Rhaenyra's own sons are brown haired and brown eyed. And while I have no doubt that the show will likely change this storyline significantly, we are using book canon. For what it's worth, I think it's significant that the one canonically Black dragonrider is the one who does not get her dragonriding skills from her "pure" Valyrian blood, but through skill and perseverance. It's a deconstruction of racial supremacy, but it doesn't work if she is simply another hidden Valyrian.

But you might have noticed the art gives Aegon a more golden skin tone, and that's because his mixed heritage is a part of his story. And although later on some Hightowers are described as having light blonde hair (possibly because Rhaena marries into the bloodline), Oldtown is very close to Dorne, and the southern part of the Reach is closest to the Summer Isles of any part of the realm. Oldtown is this major trading port, with people coming in and out from all over the world for thousands of years. Oldtown has a history of being a center of trade for a lot longer than King's Landing has, so we imagine the southern Reach as being as pretty diverse place, a bit like the Mediterranean in our world. It's fair to say you'd have Reacher families with a wide variety of skin tones, which is why you see that in @aifsaath's drawings of Aegon, and in our descriptions, he is indeed darker than Baela.

[jeyneofpoole]

'when i have to pretend to care about targaryen blood quantum valyrian supremacy dragon bullshit instead of alicent drowning herself in that lake' the targs r literally the main characters and alicent was only adapted this way to be more likable with the audience hope this helps 😕 cant wait for her and those kids of hers to die and that 'supremacy' to sit the throne for years to come

you’re right aegon the conqueror possessed the mandate of heaven and to criticize the targaryen dynasty is to question the will of the gods i’m so sorry i’ll start self flagellating posthaste my liege. quick question though your grace do you actually believe in blood purity or is everybody just sort of agreeing to play pretend. oh no you actually believe in the divine right of kings. oh wow i was not expecting that. um i don’t really know how to proceed from here your grace my sincerest apologies. you could burn me alive if that might make you feel better?

[knowledgeabletrash]

Homies I’m gonna be so real I think a lot of people really miss the point of hotd and got in general. The whole green vs blacks argument feels very akin to the team peeta/team gale phenomenon in the Hunger Games fandom- the very existence of these “teams” in any serious context is a manifestation of the very thing their media is criticizing.

You’re not supposed to be EITHER side in the Dance of Dragons. Spin it any way you want, but as a whole, the entire story is a critique on dynastic monarchy and blood/racial purity in politics. Both Rhaenyra and Aegon II are vying for power to a fundamentally corrupt system that, really, neither of them are entitled to or equipped to have. Dynastic Monarchy Bad, yaknow?

Neither one of them deserve the throne, just like every monarch who inherited their power from their family before them. The Targs in general have a whole lot of Mandate of Heaven/Manifest Destiny/Blood Purity thing going on that Martin is clearly criticizing in the series as a whole.

The point of the Dance of Dragons is that it is the result of two people who both believed that they were, through some law or divinity, The Chosen who deserved power. House Targaryen already had it all, but tore itself apart over their own ideas of prophecy and destiny, Who Deserved It More. There’s a reason neither Rhaenyra or Aegon II end up on the throne, there’s a reason that almost all of the Targs died in the war: it’s a cautionary tale. Through the Dance, Martin is able to criticize both the Valyrian Supremacy ideals of the Targs and the patriarchal governments within Westeros. Monarchy and patriarchy hurt everyone.

I think most fans with media comprehension understand that both sides of the war committed unforgivable atrocities, and both sides experienced unimaginable loss and grief. The irony is, it is almost all self-inflicted. By playing The Game, Rhae, Aegon, and House Targaryen lost everything, and the rest of Westeros was just collateral.

Anyway I don’t wanna see anymore misogynistic bullshit. You can critique the characters without saying the most sexist shit imaginable (this goes for greens and blacks, I’ve seen some truly heinous shit in the trenches). This show is fun and really enjoyable to watch, and I would love to see a fan community that isn’t constantly at each others throats over made up characters in a made up war.

[wyldfell]

saw someone arguing that targ antis miss the point because all westerosi lords operate under the primacy of their bloodlines, so targs are no different (which i would argue is a background point of grrm's work anyway, like. we know this. feudalism = bad for everyone but especially the common folk. no one is advocating for feudalism lol) but there is the sort of blood supremacy that governs the succession of nobles and keeps bastards and the lowborn 'in their place' and then there is the sort of blood supremacy the targaryens perpetuate through deliberate inbreeding and by feeding the myth that they are closer to gods than everyone else (to the detriment of their own house and the members that compose it!). it's not that targ critical fans don't see the relationship between them and the noble lords, it's that house targaryen epitomizes the terrible apex of this sort of mentality. sorry if we don't buy what they're selling

[boonoonoonus]

People only care about House Velaryon as much as it pertains to creating this upotian idea of racial neutrality. However, when you press to say the optics of whiteness perpetuating a form of ethnic cleansing in the House, everyone is blind. They can't see that, and the reason is because whiteness can never see itself as anything but ulturistic. People cannot comprehend, nor can they write anything that treats non-white characters as people with their own motivations, beliefs, and sense of morality because then they'd have to stop using them as tools. Laenor Velaryon is used in this way in fandom to prop up the Targaryens narrative concerning white supremacy, colonisation, and classism. It's ludicrous that's there is no fanfiction or meta or anything interrogating the possibility that House Velaryon could be justified in their dislike of the succession crisis Rhaenyra causes or that Laenor may be upset with her. He is never more than her gay best friend because that is the only role a gay biracial man can play for a white woman.

This is problematic in as much that making a biracial man support someone who is representative of systems of oppression in any which way without critical engagement is dangerous and an oversight. Making House Velaryon black could have been interesting. Instead, it's invited white people on mass to prop up black people as support for their racist fantasies. By that, I mean any writing/headcanon/thought experiment that sees House Velaryon just be Rhaenyra's strongest supporters without explaining why, is just erasure and tokenism. (Sidenote, no one ever gives a why and I think in part it's because media literacy is dead and whiteness has become so ingrained as the standard people cannot fathom why you would never just support the main white character no matter how asinine they are. There is no good argument, and no one wants to do the work to try to create one. Fair enough, no one can demand your labour, but it leave black characters in a sidelined and tokenistic position that supports white people taking them out for brownie points when needed.)

Laenor isn't a person, he's a mesh of plot relevant reactions and external support to make Rhaenyra and the writer by extension look and feel better. Both Laenor and Laena are shown in fanfiction and the TV show to be useful by the very act of their disposal, and no one pauses to wonder if that is a violent act. (It is. It's antiblack and plays into hegemonic violence against black bodies).

Also, the breeding kink of the white supremacist line of thinking shows itself in the way in which people argue the importance of Rhaenyras line continuing by blood, but conveniently saying that the choice to adopt on behalf of House Velaryon is progressive and their blood doesn't matter, choice does. The parallels between this argument and the likes of the Tuskegee experiment or sterilisation of non white persons with vaginas in hospitals and prisons whilst encouraging white people who are capable of giving birth to do so are immense. The willingness of people to fall into white supremacist lines of thinking when arguing for a fictional character is astounding, however its ultimately a pet peeve on my behalf. There are very few critical spaces in which blackness is welcomed in life, and existential alienation extends into the digital and fictional worlds. People are comfortable with prejudice and white supremacy ,it's is the basis on which the West builds legitimacy and precedent, it is not remiss then to say that the inheritors of these social precedents replicate the behaviour and line of thinking.

This is not to say people are unaware, but often the "fun" of whiteness is to be able to not have to worry about the likes of Black, Indigenous, Asian or Pacific islander people because preservation of white happiness is more important. White people get to live in a utopian ideal all the time when it pertains to race and have the freedom to say that discussions on such topics harsh their vibe so they do not have to engage.

But whatever, who cares what I think, I'm just a Black person on the Internet.

[allyriadayne]

yeah i don't get the whole daemon is a valyrian supremacist thing?

and from another anon:

Yeah why is Daemon the only one who gets called a Valyrian supremacist?

i posted this question to my twitter mutuals some time ago and got one answer that actually made so much sense when you really think about the issue. it goes something like this (sorry couldn't find the og tweet 😩): most people think of valyrian supremacy/blood purism with a harry potter background and the pureblood ideology when it's a completely different thing that doesn't actually happen in the show or books at all. and everything clicked!!

going back to daemon, show!daemon to be more specific, he does show a preference for reading the histories and knowing the language of old valyria but i wouldn't call it him being a supremacist (very weighty!) or feeling a specific superiority about it that it's not already tied to him being a prince and one of the highest ranking man in the realm. i think what most people forget about this is that targaryens are one of the last scions of a dead culture (well you'll never call a culture dead, only transformed because a part of it will always live in its people etc. but for clarity's sake. i know we are not here for an anthropology class) and to me it's normal that its member would want to preserve it in a way. viserys has his big lego model and the others have the language and their dragons as a way to connect with what it once was. i wouldn't call that a cultural superiority at all esp when daemon or any targaryen try to exterminate or oppress that which is not valyrian (again, very weighty terms! and i wish people would have more care when talking about these issues).

most of the examples i've seen about people calling daemon a purist come from 1) daemon sleeping with silver haired women 2) criticizing alicent's new decor 3) marrying laena/hating rhea 4) speaking old valyrian. which really doesn't cut it for me?? most can be explained by daemon being a hater in general. we know he hates otto and the hightowers because he's always thought they've kept viserys and him apart and therefore made viserys weak. he /would/ had a comment about alicent changing the decor and covering the dragon orgy murals. the silver haired women well, he's still the creepy uncle, we've known he's been fixated on rhaenyra for a while and it's probably also a manifestation of being cast out of the family since he was 16, an illusion of being close to his family. same thing with rhea, he doesn't hate her because she's not valyrian, i thought that was pretty obvious.

lyonel strong is the one who advises viserys to marry laena velaryon because she is of "pure valyrian stock", would you call him a blood purist? i mean there is also the issue that most men in westeros are very proud of their heritage and i wouldn't put daemon above them at all, he's squarely in the middle. would you call the northerners blood purists because most marry in the same area with descendants of the first men and don't care about southerners? i've always thought daemon marries laena in the show because she's one of the few people who could understand him and after spending almost 20 years with a wife who hated him and he hated in return, he wanted someone more compatible and who could share his hobbies (and of course, she grabbed his attention at the wedding and the storyline about the sea lord of braavos' son was someone laena wanted to get rid off too + rhaenyra marrying and him needing to forget her fast).

what i'm trying to say is that i understand there is a sort of need to keep the line "pure" but it is to keep the dragons inside the family and i wouldn't even call it purism because targs are marrying half targs like jocelyn baratheon, aemma arryn etc, at least in this side of the dance. on the other side, after it, it's another different issue altogether where targs start practicing exogamy more often. but i don't think daemon is more or less proud than other people in the same timeline even.

[lemonhemlock]

I've seen so many criticism regarding The targaryen but one caught my attention is that they're white colonizers-coded , do you think it's a valid point against this family? Obviously I didn't read the books so i don't know much about them beside dany in the show but it would be strange if that's true in the books when dany fans cry about her "unfair" treatment by D&D

It is true, anon. The Targaryens are the whitest of the white, with white-silver hair and purple eyes. Special magical blood that they prize amongst all things and prefer to practice incest instead of marrying outside their family and diluting their dragon DNA.

The optics are a little different since Westeros is based on medieval England, so most people are white European stand-ins, with Dorne being the most diverse. But no other family or ethnic group emphazises their racial superiority in such a way like Targaryens do. Lannisters are white, blonde, with light-coloured eyes, too, but they're not framed like the Aryan Master Race, if you get my drift.

It's harder to see with Dany because she's the last Targaryen left, supposedly, and also can't have children, so it's a little harder to be a blood supremacist when you're a party of one.

Of course, there is also the real possibility that George thought he should include elf-like characters with unusual colouring in his 90s fantasy book and things kind of escalated from there. But there's a lot of bloody supremacy discourse that Targaryens themselves perpetuate - sure, not with the intention of committing genocide in Westeros - but with the intention of setting themselves apart as special and above common men, "closer to gods", so to speak.

Add that to the fact that Valyrians not only terrorized Essos and enslaved various POC-coded peoples, they also brutalized those slaves in their magical volcano mines and used them to fuel their blood sacrifices to keep their society going.... and it becomes a lot.

[aegor-bamfsteel]

Hi! Merry late christmas and happy new year!

Why was important to the targaryens to have a magical bond to dragons when they could bond the same way with sheepstealer?? Is bcs they were afraid to loose the bond or something? Does this bond(🐑) works the same way one bonds over a loyal dog?

Also, i have to congratulate Grrm with the targs, bcs the way he show them, with their superficial "splendor🌟" and the other real putrid side of them, is honestly simple but very... effective and great!

It's just him saying "it doesn't matter if you have a friking-amazing-dragon who can conquer a continent, you can still be a piece of shit". Personally, I love them for being an entertaining but insane house just like the Lannisters!

Hey there, anon! Very merry belated holidays to you as well.

The Valyrians required a magical bond with dragons—which they gained through magic horns and very possibly blood magic—rather than just gaining their trust with food because it’s quicker (Sheepstealer was tamed over many days), doesn’t take as many resources, can happen at any age (Targ infants were able to bond with their hatchmates, while taming through food means you have to be at least a teen), doesn’t need to take the dragon’s personality into account (Sheepstealer was more interested in eating sheep than attacking humans, but other dragons like Cannibal and Vhagar were more vicious), and probably most importantly, preserves the myth of Valyrian blood supremacy. If they were known to just tame their dragons by giving them meat, people would realize their blood doesn’t make them special and someone with enough patience, courage, sheep and a dragon with the right temperament could do it. I don’t think they were afraid of losing the bond, since Nettles and Sheepstealer seemed emotionally very tight with him agreeing to fly her anywhere; the bond only ends after the rider dies. I agree that at least what GRRM initially set out to establish with the Targs (before he let his fascination with them take over the story and retconned some sympathetic traits/people) was interesting. They believe themselves above other people due to their special blood/looks/ability to control dragons, which led them to unite much of the continent…and yet were done in by this arrogance, insularity, and general refusal to learn or consider other perspectives. And what he said about dragons as the nuclear deterrent, how they can conquer and force people but they can’t help a ruler govern wisely, is pretty good. My personal problematic fave house is the Baratheons because their flaws aren’t put on a pedestal and they have understandable context for their actions (Rhányra vs Aegon wishes it could be Stannis vs Renly), but I’m not gonna criticize you for appreciating some bombastic cartoon villains (my second favorite problematic house is the Greyjoys, many of whom have the same campy evil as the Targs) when you clearly understand that’s who they are.

[la-pheacienne]

In the book, Daemon gave his non-Targaryen paramour a dragon egg for their child but sure, he's a Valyrian supremacist (wtf does that mean ??)

Another cryptic ask. I don't understand if this is a green stan coming at me or a black stan not getting the sarcasm of the phrase??

So this phrase means that Daemon isn't a Valyrian supremacist because he valued his illegitimate child with a non Valyrian prostitute enough to give them a dragon egg. So he actually doesn't care if the child has pure Valyrian blood or not as long as it's his child, he has the same value as his other pure Valyrian blood children. Which is a correct statement. So yeah if you're a black stan that didn't understand, there it is, if you're a green stan, you can continue reading, it will be fun.

Valyrian supremacism does not exist. The very term gives me ick. We're talking about a fictional, magical, incestuous noble family of weird people that happened to be the ruling family for centuries. Supremacism does not enter that discussion. Of course the ruling family are "supremacists" (🤮) in the general sense, they are the ruling family in a feudal context. But it's not relevant information or criticism because we are talking about a political system that is BASED on certain people's supremacy over others. Supremacy (not supremacism) is the quality of being superior to others. Targaryens, Starks, Lannisters, Hightowers, Tyrells, Martells ALL have that quality. They ALL have the privilege of being superior to others because of their blood. Among them, Targaryens are superior (not supremacists, superior) because they are the strongest house with the most special magic thanks to their dragons. They also happen to be the rulers. So of course among all the houses that are superior to common folk thanks to their blood, the ruling house is higher in the hierarchy.

So supremacy of nobility IS the basic foundation of this universe. Supremacism however is a modern political term designed to criticize the belief that you are superior to others because of a certain characteristic you have. So supremacy is a quality, supremacism is a political term. This political term should be used ONLY in the relevant political context and NOT in a political context that is literally BASED on blood supremacy.

I'm trying to explain this in the simplest words possible but using terms as white or Valyrian supremacism/colonialism/anti war for the ASOIAF-Fire and Blood universe makes you look stupid. It's like, reading a book about the French monarchy and supporting all noble Houses except the ruling house, so other Ducs, Marquis, Counts etc because the King is a supremacist. And somehow they are not.

[lyannastark]

"d*ny isn't an imperialist, she's aeg*n the conqueror reborn" aeg*n the conqueror was literally a white supremacist who threatened the whole of the seven kingdoms with death by dragonfire if they didn't subjugate themselves to him. that is the definition of an imperialist character. everyone has their own faves, but please do not act like people's criticism's of d*ny are unfounded because of sexism. it misrepresents and oversimplifies the argument.

okay, if you have an issue with aegon’s invasion, fine. do you also consider the andals to be imperialists? or the first men? both resulted in the killing of countless people and the near extinction of the children of the forest.

my biggest problem is with throwing around words without any regard for their historical context. when I think of imperialism, I think of countries in the indian subcontinent, africa, and middle east that resulted in millions dying, resources being stolen, local economies being destroyed, and increased ethnic conflict in order to subjugate the people, the effect of which we live with today. imperialism was the exploitation of other countries in order to benefit their own (e.g. britain, france, belgium, etc.) in order to increase their power and economy. the wealth of these countries were built on the oppression of different populations around the world.

how is that remotely similar to what aegon, rhaenys, and visenya did? they conquered westeros, just like the first men and andals did. even the rhoynar came to westeros and took over dorne. the targaryens conquered and ruled westeros, but they didn’t exploit the kingdoms in order to benefit their country (dragonstone in this case). they united the seven kingdoms together under their dynasty and entrenched themselves in the society they were ruling. plus aegon’s conquest was most likely due to a prophecy about the war of the dawn. this seems more akin to famous empires throughout world history rather than imperialism. @eldritch-crone​ has a good meta I was reading recently here that explains better than I could.

and white supremacy??? why, because they think their house is hot shit? just like the lannisters do? and the starks who pride themselves on having the blood of the first men (like how targaryens are proud of being the blood of valyria)? how is this different than every other noble house in this feudalist society? to go back to imperialism - all of this was done while telling the colonized people that their languages, traditions, etc. were “barbaric.” they manipulated science and religion to justify thinking that other races were backwards and less developed. they saw it as their precious duty to civilize them. they even took people and put them in human zoos in europe to ogle at. this is white supremacy. the targaryens - as well as other noble houses - are classist because of the feudalistic society they live in. 

that said, I think grrm is deserving of (a lot) of criticism for his depiction of essosi cultures. his writing is racist and some of his worst writing in the series. he absolutely deserves criticism for that and is one of the biggest problems I have with dany’s narrative (although I like dany). but to equate slaver’s bay or aegon’s conquest with imperialism/colonialsm is frankly insulting and undermines the horrors those entailed.

[lemonhemlock]

Do u think otto and alicent believe in targ exceptionalism? I know this benefits her kids and all but does she actually believe this?

I dont really like all the valyrian supremacy that hotd keeps pushing. It doesn't feel like they are critical to the targs/valyrian supremacy enough for the horror empire that valyria was. When laena said we are the blood of old valyria, etc... I got really annoyed coz with all the race swapping they did with the velaryons who are actually super white, a woc saying such things which are clearly white supremacist really was jarring and off putting. I wished they didn't put that line for her.

I mean they did make aegon the only one who seems to have an aversion to incest the worst.

Similarly do u think jace becomes disillusioned with all the fire and blood and targs are awesome stuff?

I have had this question sitting in my inbox for ages and I finally get 'round to answering it.

Perhaps controversially, I am going to say yes. And I suspect that anyone would believe in Targ exceptionalism if they were transported in-universe. They can form a super special bond with fire-breathing monsters that only listen to them & only them somehow via magical telepathy? And they can fly? Let's be real here. That would be super impressive for anyone.

Impressive & badass & cool doesn't equal good, though. A few select people having access to unlimited destructive power without any checks and balances is decidedly not a good thing for the population of Westeros or of any other place. The Targaryens can be exceptional and the world can also be better off without them - these two sentences are not mutually-exclusive. I would go so far as to say that this exceptionalism is proof that what they are doing is unnatural and violating the laws of morality in the most basic sense.

George is definitely keeping us in the dark about Valyria for now. We don't know how exactly the Valyrians came to master dragons or how dragons were created in the first place, but the crumbs we did receive do not paint a pretty picture: blood magic, human-beast experiments, slavery to fund and fuel everything via literal human sacrifice. It's very likely that the Valyrians had to resort to horrible ritualistic sacrifices to maintain their dragon relationship and after that relied on incest to keep their new pets bonded to their families.

So, yeah, sure, riding a dragon would be an incredible experience & anyone who could do that would be held in high esteem, but at what cost? The whole point is that this is not an avenue open to everyone. You have to pay a hefty price for such a superpower. How much of your humanity would you have to surrender in order to transcend like that? That's the question, isn't? It's deviant, abnormal, wrong. And like anything that bleeds into the sphere of the supernatural, it has no place in this world.

Interesting point about Laena. I'm really in two minds about the Velaryons being race-swapped. On the one hand, they are extremely (and I mean extremely) white in the books; the artwork for them looks like something out of an Aryan propaganda textbook. And they are problematic in their own way, but now criticism of them is limited as a result of them being the most prominent POCs in the show. The Velaryons may be the "blood of Old Valyria", but they were never dragonlords, and that placed them at the bottom of the hierarchical pyramid for nobles. So, while they were definitely better off than the common people, peasants and slaves, it does feel like they're kind of begging for scraps when appealing to legitimacy like that.

I don't think Jace becomes disillusioned; there's nothing in the text to support that. He is a staunch supporter of his mother's cause until the end. He suggests they should attack King's Landing on dragonback and lets the dragonseeds claim dragons to help them out militarily. Those are not the actions of someone rejecting their Targaryen legacy.

[aegor-bamfsteel]

Hello! I was hoping to add a bit to your thoughts on Bloodraven. I agree wholeheartedly with you that Bloodraven is a terrible person and made terrible decisions. But I disagree with you that he’s rewarded for it. The novels do quite a but to frame him as an evil person. Yes he’s a magical greenseer and has a lot of magical power, but he’s also a scary tree person with roots growing in him. He lives in a dark cave he can never leave with creepy elves that have probably killed Bran’s friend. There’s also a lot of theories that Bloodraven drove Euron crazy when testing Euron for magical abilities like he tested Bran. GRRM looks to be setting him up as a dark twist to the wise mentor trope while the show treated him like Gandalf.

Hello, Anon! Bl00draven as a villain is actually a very controversial opinion/theory in tumblr fandom, (which is why I misspell his name and use his anti tag) with at least some considering him a straight-up hero trying to save the world, or an anti-hero who commits atrocities to achieve “noble goals” (including, if I remember correctly, the same person who wrote at least part of the theory that Euron is Bl00draven’s ex-student). I believe Bl00draven is “a terrible person [who] made terrible decisions”, but I’m probably in the minority, (you’d probably find a better discussion with people who think he’s a hero in your analysis of how his character is framed), but you haven’t indicated why you don’t think he’s rewarded for his actions. 

I have written about how the narrative protects Bl00draven from the consequences of his actions in the post you’re responding to, in a response to warsofasoiaf, and a response to godihatethisfreakingcat. In summary:

The two times BR suffers any setback (losing an eye; being sent to the Wall for high treason), it ends up working out for him in the end (not being affected by monocular vision at all if he held his own in a second duel against Aegor Rivers, getting a “scary” reputation and possibly greenseeing powers; having 200 of his personal guard and Prince Aemon accompany him, getting to keep the only Targaryen ancestral sword when he’s supposed to be punished, getting elected Lord Commander despite his horrible tenure as Hand, and deserting the Night’s Watch to become an immortal greenseer despite desertion being a death sentence)

When it looks like BR is going to suffer other setbacks, they magically go away (he and Baelor have a dispute over how to treat the defeated Blackfyre rebels, but Baelor dies before he can become king; he mocks Maekar in front of his own son and unsubtly threatens to kidnap Egg, but is said to have become Maekar’s Hand; his spy network fails to capture Aegor Rivers multiple times and couldn’t keep an eye on his ship as it made way for the Wall, but he isn’t punished for failing to do the one job he promised to do)

BR never had to work to gain anyone’s trust or his positions of authority, despite being terrible at his job (his mother was a friend of Da3ron II’s from birth; he was granted an ancestral Valyrian sword as a teenager despite not being the best swordsman; he gets his first Small Council position by age 20; Da3ron II trusts him enough to start a war on his say-so; Aerys makes him his Hand over his more competent brother Maekar; Maekar keeps him as Hand despite resenting him for decades; he’s made Night’s Watch Lord Commander). Maintaining so much power either undermines your claim that the narrative frames him as a villain (if he’s so untrustworthy, why do the supposed protagonists keep giving him jobs?), or it makes the characters who’ve granted him this power into idiots (at least 2 of whom are lauded as intelligent or clever).

Other villainous characters have done less harm than Bl00draven, but are punished for it while he gets to keep his power:

The infamously corrupt High Septon was torn apart by starving King’s Landing smallfolk during the bread riots of 299

The corrupt Rego Draz, who levied high taxes and tolls on the smallfolk (abuse of the smallfolk amidst a humanitarian crisis? sounds familiar), was stoned to death by a starving mob during the harsh winter and plague of 59

Rhaenyra was believed to have murdered Helaena Targaryen, and her husband did arrange for the murder of Helaena’s son (a parent and two young sons murdered in cold blood? sounds familiar). Thousands of smallfolk rioted out of desire for justice for the three, which caused the death of 5 dragons, Rhaenyra’s remaining son Joffrey, and Rhaenyra’s own flight from the capital. She never regained the throne again

Mysaria of Lys, explicitly compared to Bl00draven as Mistress of Whispers, also arranged for the murder of Helaena’s son Jaehaerys, informed on Nettles to Rhaenyra resulting in a warrant for her death (informing on someone to a monarch baseless rumors resulting in a warrant for their arrest? sounds familiar), and may have contributed to Helaena’s suicide that the riots were about. When King’s Landing fell, she was stripped naked and whipped to death as she was forced to walk out of the city.

Tyanna of Pentos, similarly mistress of whispers like Mysaria, tortured the king’s nephew to death (after having him imprisoned? sounds familiar), tortured dozens of men and women including rumored lover Alys Harroway, kidnapped children to ensure their mother’s good behavior while being repeatedly raped, and allegedly poisoned her fellow queens in order to be Maegor’s true wife. She was brutally murdered by the man she sought to influence, her heart thrown to the dogs

Bl00draven deliberately shot 2 unarmed 12-year-olds in front of their father to win a war, ordered the smallfolk back to their lands during the midst of a drought and after the Great Spring Sickness, caused the death of a young man under suspicious circumstances, threatened to keep the son of his rival a hostage, killed a man he promised safe passage to, denied critical aid to the crown’s vassals during ironborn raids, and created a reign of fear and paranoia that resulted in the deaths of innocent smallfolk. Bafflingly, while there are apparently riots and violence and rebellion, he makes routine trips into Flea Bottom to keep the people in line (yes, the smallfolk in King’s Landing are so complacent to authoritarian rulers as I just mentioned) and survives all of them (relatively) unscathed. Not only does he keep his position as Hand, or gained a new position as Lord Commander, but he lives to a ripe old age before running away to the cave to be an immortal greenseer with infinite knowledge. My point in comparing the actions and consequences of characters similar to Bl00draven is that if the smallfolk or the Targaryens were written consistently, he would’ve been horribly murdered for corruption or insubordination long before he ever met Bran. I understand he would have to live into canon era to be Bran’s mentor; but GRRM broke the rules of his own universe by letting Bl00draven get away with too much to be believable while giving him even more power. It is inconsistent writing that makes his survival due to authorial fiat than any skill or allies. That’s why I consider him possibly the worst-written character in the series.

Bl00draven has not committed enough good deeds to be a hero (in my opinion; other people consider keeping Da3ron’s progeny on the throne for a few generations longer to be heroic). But neither has he suffered for the consequences of his actions like a villain. We know that the Freys and Boltons will face comeuppance for their atrocities in the Red Wedding and at Winterfell because it’s already clear they have sown the seeds of their own destruction; the Freys’ violation of guest right contributed to the breakdown of the rule of law that made honorable parley impossible, and their murder of Catelyn Stark led to Lady Stoneheart in the Riverlands killing Freys with the Brotherhood, and their murder of Wendel Manderly led to his father Wyman orchestrating some of their deaths; the Boltons’ role in the Red Wedding led to nearly universal hatred among the northern lords, and caused the mountain clans to ally with Stannis to get them out, and Ramsay’s rape of who they think is Arya Stark just gives them further cause to resent their traitorous overlords. I don’t have to explain how Tywin’s cult of Lannister supremacy doesn’t survive his death as he’s offed in the most humiliating manner by the son he despised, since Jaime, Cersei, and Tyrion are either imprisoned, enslaved, or in a trial for their life by book 5. Contrast Bl00draven, because the family he most wronged (the Blackfyres) are either no longer around or are uninterested in seeing him brought to justice; he certainly sowed the seeds of destruction, but he never reaped them himself (if anything, he got more powerful); instead the Targaryens did. I don’t see how he will be getting any personal comeuppance in the future, unless he is somehow unplugged from the weirwood network and executed as a deserter to the Night’s Watch (the Starks do have a pattern of executing those guys, so maybe it will be Bran’s turn). Until then, I don’t foresee him being a good asoiaf villain either.